SOSA Discussion

persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
In my opinion, one of the most abused and misunderstood rules in live poker is the Show One, Show All rule.

Not only is it misunderstood to the point of wasting time, it specifically discourages fun at the table. Also, there are even pure idiots who think that it refers to one card being shown to the table triggering the necessity of the other card.

I want to be able to flash my cards, to play with the information that is at the heart of the game, and for others to do the same. If someone suspects collusion, they should be able to invoke this rule. (But of course i never collude or angle shoot, and it would be apparent to any mammalian brain.)

My question to the group is 1) am I right or am I missing something, and 2) what can we do to change the culture of all the party poopers who insist on using anti-collusion rule to restrict the natural joys of the game?
«13

Comments

  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,013 -
    I don't think of SOSA as an anti-collusion rule, it's an information rule. I'm very much in favor in cash games of players being able to show their cards when HU (this is typically the case in Vegas anyway), but only to the whole table and if it isn't part of some huge time-wasting exercise. I'm very much opposed to a hand being shown to less than everyone else at the table.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    I don't think of SOSA as an anti-collusion rule, it's an information rule. I'm very much in favor in cash games of players being able to show their cards when HU (this is typically the case in Vegas anyway), but only to the whole table and if it isn't part of some huge time-wasting exercise. I'm very much opposed to a hand being shown to less than everyone else at the table.

    See, this is exactly what I am talking about. It's an information rule because information is a part of collusion. But in a friendly, lovable game of poker, or 99% of games, no one is colluding.

    It's abused exactly for information.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,013 -
    I'm not following your argument. What exactly is it that you want to be able to do that you cannot currently do?
    Moderation In Moderation
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I want to be able to show a card to someone when I fold or win without some anxious dweeb screaming SOSA.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,013 -
    Okay. I still maintain SOSA has nothing to do with collusion and I think this is possibly the worst poker-related idea you've ever had. I share your interest in making playing poker more fun, but cannot fathom how this does anything other than waste time and irritate everyone else at the table.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Ok. We are definitely at odds on this. Let's hear more from others.
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,013 -
    Yup I'm intrigued to know mass sentiment on this one.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • blindraiseblindraise Red Chipper Posts: 154 ✭✭
    I never ask to see another players cards when they show their neighbor, I get called out alot by OMCs and MAGs though. It's annoying, and I've pissed people off (OMC: "Dealer dealer whatre those cards he showed his neighbor!" Me: "Relax." OMC: "You relax! You showed him you cant show us?!?" Me: "Relaax.")

    Idk, I never really thought of the removal of the rule as a possibility so now I expose my cards to my neighbors much more subtly when I feel like doing so.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    blindraise wrote: »
    I never ask to see another players cards when they show their neighbor, I get called out alot by OMCs and MAGs though. It's annoying, and I've pissed people off (OMC: "Dealer dealer whatre those cards he showed his neighbor!" Me: "Relax." OMC: "You relax! You showed him you cant show us?!?" Me: "Relaax.")

    Idk, I never really thought of the removal of the rule as a possibility so now I expose my cards to my neighbors much more subtly when I feel like doing so.

    You are a mensch and on the side of the light. Not asking for the removal of the rule - not at all. Asking for a culture where the weak minded don't win.
  • LukaLuka Red Chipper Posts: 216 ✭✭✭
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    Okay. I still maintain SOSA has nothing to do with collusion and I think this is possibly the worst poker-related idea you've ever had. I share your interest in making playing poker more fun, but cannot fathom how this does anything other than waste time and irritate everyone else at the table.

    Other than in your opinion wasting time and irritating people at the table is there some other reason you think this conduct is such a problem it mandates a rule?
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,013 -
    Luka wrote: »
    TheGameKat wrote: »
    Okay. I still maintain SOSA has nothing to do with collusion and I think this is possibly the worst poker-related idea you've ever had. I share your interest in making playing poker more fun, but cannot fathom how this does anything other than waste time and irritate everyone else at the table.

    Other than in your opinion wasting time and irritating people at the table is there some other reason you think this conduct is such a problem it mandates a rule?

    It creates an information asymmetry. And in Vegas, what would happen is everyone would grab a seat change button so they could sit next to the weak-minded sap flashing their cards. More generally, I'd like to see a greater uniformity of rules across regions AND their consistent enforcement. This idea runs directly counter to that.

    But as I understand it, persuadeo thinks the rule should stand, just that certain people should be allowed to break it?
    Moderation In Moderation
  • CactusCardsCactusCards ArizonaRed Chipper Posts: 106 ✭✭
    edited April 29
    I’m in the camp of “who cares”. Games are typically more fun and looser if they’re friendly, personally I think invoking SOSA makes you “that guy” at the table that no one (hopefully) wants to be.

    A little biased as I happen to be super guilty of flashing my card(s) to neighbors for a sweat when I’m HU with someone across the table - I look at that as free advertising that I could potentially use to my advantage afterwards, but again if someone calls me on it, “who cares”.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    ITT Gamekat calls me a Weak Minded Sap. How is this going to end, I wonder?
  • TheGameKatTheGameKat Posts: 2,013 -
    persuadeo wrote: »
    ITT Gamekat calls me a Weak Minded Sap. How is this going to end, I wonder?

    Awww c'mon, that was pay back!

    I'll butt out for 48 hours, I'm genuinely intrigued by this and want to get a large sample of views.
    Moderation In Moderation
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
  • NYCRyNYCRy Red Chipper Posts: 336 ✭✭✭
    persuadeo wrote: »
    In my opinion, one of the most abused and misunderstood rules in live poker is the Show One, Show All rule.

    Not only is it misunderstood to the point of wasting time, it specifically discourages fun at the table. Also, there are even pure idiots who think that it refers to one card being shown to the table triggering the necessity of the other card.

    I want to be able to flash my cards, to play with the information that is at the heart of the game, and for others to do the same. If someone suspects collusion, they should be able to invoke this rule. (But of course i never collude or angle shoot, and it would be apparent to any mammalian brain.)

    My question to the group is 1) am I right or am I missing something, and 2) what can we do to change the culture of all the party poopers who insist on using anti-collusion rule to restrict the natural joys of the game?

    Just to clarify - you are alluding to showing your neighbor your cards like as a sweat or flashing them before you fold - not winning a pot and then showing your neighbor(and no one else) before raking it in?

    If this is the case I agree. It makes poker more fun. And as the other poster said, I'm sure at the high stakes this silliness isn't even an issue. I would hope it is extremely rare for another player at the table to demand a hand be shown or dead during the hand if someone wants to show their neighbor. If not, that's not a game I want to be in
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    NYCRy wrote: »
    persuadeo wrote: »
    In my opinion, one of the most abused and misunderstood rules in live poker is the Show One, Show All rule.

    Not only is it misunderstood to the point of wasting time, it specifically discourages fun at the table. Also, there are even pure idiots who think that it refers to one card being shown to the table triggering the necessity of the other card.

    I want to be able to flash my cards, to play with the information that is at the heart of the game, and for others to do the same. If someone suspects collusion, they should be able to invoke this rule. (But of course i never collude or angle shoot, and it would be apparent to any mammalian brain.)

    My question to the group is 1) am I right or am I missing something, and 2) what can we do to change the culture of all the party poopers who insist on using anti-collusion rule to restrict the natural joys of the game?

    Just to clarify - you are alluding to showing your neighbor your cards like as a sweat or flashing them before you fold - not winning a pot and then showing your neighbor(and no one else) before raking it in?

    If this is the case I agree. It makes poker more fun. And as the other poster said, I'm sure at the high stakes this silliness isn't even an issue. I would hope it is extremely rare for another player at the table to demand a hand be shown or dead during the hand if someone wants to show their neighbor. If not, that's not a game I want to be in

    Yes, that is the main case. You and Luka are right - at higher stakes, it is less of an issue because, through logic or intuition, these players understand what is going on. (And yes, if some pedant on HSP would have told Daniel or Sammy if they flashed a card that everyone has to see it, they would have never been invited back.)

    I'm passionate about this issue because this is a real issue that can be solved organically, not a poker culture windmill to tilt at. You can't force shy people to be entertaining, you can't force more women to play poker, you can't force people to sell at the mark-up you approve of, you can't make the games go back in time. (I was just shown a way one player is using solves in real time - the walls are closing in.) But the essential game, live poker, can still be, and needs to be fun, and so the ruthless abuse of an anti-collusion fail-safe is something everyone can do something about by simply understanding the nature of the rule.
  • jfarrow13jfarrow13 Red Chipper Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭✭
    I generally play in a light atmosphere, and I liked to show my cards often, depending on what image I want to influence in the game. I do admit to being guilty of in a big pot, if he shows someone, especially if I was torn about it being a bluff....I kinda wanna know man. Especially if I am trying to formulate an opinion on how a player plays.

    But I see your point, just like how one time I think you said when you make a river call and you have a bluff catcher, and they say "your good", it's an easy turn over of your cards to claim the pot. Shit, sometimes when I call a river bluff catch, especially if I set it up to know I specifically want to bluff catch up to a certain amount and they put that amount or less in, I just snap call it and turn over my cards. If it's not a huge pot....whatever. How much money have I lost in my career by not being able to see what cards they are willing to bluff with? Probably minimal. How stupid is it to be like "you show, no YOU show no I called you NONONONO" like I get it, there are rules, but this is probably not what the rules were made to prevent.
  • Doug HullDoug Hull RCP Coach Posts: 1,740 -
    jfarrow13 wrote: »
    How stupid is it to be like "you show, no YOU show no I called you NONONONO"

    It is very stupid. The person whose turn it is to show but is goofing around saying "I missed" or whatever is the one causing the stupidity. They are trying to hide information or get information from you.

    The person slowing down the game is the rude one, not the person that is waiting for the proper showdown procedure. Then they get upset, but it is all self-inflicted and they should just table their damned hand.
    Co-founder Red Chip Poker,
    Author Poker Plays You Can Use
    Author Poker Workbook for Math Geeks
  • jfarrow13jfarrow13 Red Chipper Posts: 1,253 ✭✭✭✭
    Your proposing that people are logical and follow the rules. It doesn't make it right, but it doesn't make it reality either. If someone bumps me at the bar, I am quick to say "my bad bro", even if they ran into me. A younger me used to puff up my chest, and it ended in a fair amount of fights. They ran into me. They are in the wrong. Now? I'd rather just keep enjoying myself and don't wanna be in anymore fist fights.

    If I suspect they are angling me or being a dickhead, I'd force the ruling. But that's almost never the case. I don't believe it worth my time or trouble, but it's up to every individual how firm they wanna stand on the grounds of what rules need to be observed, and if it's worth their trouble.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well Jake, as i often say to people who just doesn't get it, someday i am going to write a poker ettiquette book they'll never read.
  • John ValentineJohn Valentine Red Chipper Posts: 31 ✭✭
    The problem with showing your cards to the person next to you, is that this person is not your good buddy. He is a fellow poker player that wants your chips, and now you just showed him how you play a pair of 7s or A rag. Do you really want to do this. I find that I have enough trouble winning without giving anyone an advantage over me.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The problem with showing your cards to the person next to you, is that this person is not your good buddy. He is a fellow poker player that wants your chips, and now you just showed him how you play a pair of 7s or A rag. Do you really want to do this. I find that I have enough trouble winning without giving anyone an advantage over me.

    Fair, but let's try to stay focused. This isn't relevant to the discussion, nor is the "refuse to showdown in correct order" problem raised by jake.
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,973 ✭✭✭✭
    edited April 30
    @persuadeo

    So to me there is some times we can let SOSA go, and some when it has to be enforced. Point of this rules, to me, is to keep the game fair - that nobody can take an (to me unfair) advantage on another player (esp. weaker player).

    When SOSA shall not be enforced
    When 2 friends are playing next to each other, I'm ok not to enforce SOSA.
    Same when there are players who are obviously bad, having fun and being friendly, flashing their cards to each other.
    Because in such situations, the one seeing the cards get no advantage compare to any other players. So we can let it go and keep the game running and friendly.

    When SOSA shall be enforced
    But in other case, I'll enforce it. Especially when a good player is trying to take an advantage on a bad player by flashing his cards or seeing flashed cards. Mostly, enforcing SOSA is with the aim to deny a good V having an edge that I'd not have - we are challengers to milk the fishes and I don't want another player having an edge on the shared fish that I'd not have.

    Yes, I understand poker is a game of information and flashing your cards could get you some info; But:
    a) If you would like this info, you could just table your hand, you still have the reaction info without having to think "argl would someone being a SOSA nitty picky?" . By flashing you want to get information AND deny others (esp. the other good players) info on your hand - which is understandable for you, but not for the others: for them, you try to get "unfair" or "unbalanced" information.
    b) Also think about that: you're talking to flash your cards to a V to get his reaction and use this info. But would you do that against a strong reg or a studied player? Probably not, you don't want to show your line to someone who could understand why and how you played your hand. The cost of the reaction information would be too high compare to the information you'd give away.


    So at the end of the day, SOSA is relevant in situation to keep the game fair between good players "sharing" bad players.
    jfarrow13 wrote: »
    I generally play in a light atmosphere, and I liked to show my cards often, depending on what image I want to influence in the game. I do admit to being guilty of in a big pot, if he shows someone, especially if I was torn about it being a bluff....I kinda wanna know man. Especially if I am trying to formulate an opinion on how a player plays.

    This is a in-between situation between fair and nitty-picky - I'd also ask to see: if they show their big hand/bluff to someone, they shall show it to all (aka me). Otherwise, they could just tell his friend "I'd had XX man!"
  • RedRed Red Chipper Posts: 1,973 ✭✭✭✭
    Nota bene:
    My post / position is mostly theoretical.
    It was very rare that I asked for SOSA, and it was only in the situation described by @jfarrow13 .
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Red wrote: »
    @persuadeo

    So to me there is some times we can let SOSA go, and some when it has to be enforced. Point of this rules, to me, is to keep the game fair - that nobody can take an (to me unfair) advantage on another player (esp. weaker player).

    When SOSA shall not be enforced
    When 2 friends are playing next to each other, I'm ok not to enforce SOSA.
    Same when there are players who are obviously bad, having fun and being friendly, flashing their cards to each other.
    Because in such situations, the one seeing the cards get no advantage compare to any other players. So we can let it go and keep the game running and friendly.

    When SOSA shall be enforced
    But in other case, I'll enforce it. Especially when a good player is trying to take an advantage on a bad player by flashing his cards or seeing flashed cards. Mostly, enforcing SOSA is with the aim to deny a good V having an edge that I'd not have - we are challengers to milk the fishes and I don't want another player having an edge on the shared fish that I'd not have.

    Yes, I understand poker is a game of information and flashing your cards could get you some info; But:
    a) If you would like this info, you could just table your hand, you still have the reaction info without having to think "argl would someone being a SOSA nitty picky?" . By flashing you want to get information AND deny others (esp. the other good players) info on your hand - which is understandable for you, but not for the others: for them, you try to get "unfair" or "unbalanced" information.
    b) Also think about that: you're talking to flash your cards to a V to get his reaction and use this info. But would you do that against a strong reg or a studied player? Probably not, you don't want to show your line to someone who could understand why and how you played your hand. The cost of the reaction information would be too high compare to the information you'd give away.


    So at the end of the day, SOSA is relevant in situation to keep the game fair between good players "sharing" bad players.
    jfarrow13 wrote: »
    I generally play in a light atmosphere, and I liked to show my cards often, depending on what image I want to influence in the game. I do admit to being guilty of in a big pot, if he shows someone, especially if I was torn about it being a bluff....I kinda wanna know man. Especially if I am trying to formulate an opinion on how a player plays.

    This is a in-between situation between fair and nitty-picky - I'd also ask to see: if they show their big hand/bluff to someone, they shall show it to all (aka me). Otherwise, they could just tell his friend "I'd had XX man!"

    An interesting post. On one hand, your intense focus on 1) "good" and "bad" players, and 2) the reversal of information flow between them, has little to do with this issue, but is a plausible explanation as to why some people are so keen about invoking the rule.

    Yes, according to the rules, you "are entitled to receive equal access to information about the contents of another player’s hand." Of course the focus is on cards shown that may affect the hand in play, but is culturally extended either fairly or unfairly to every exposed piece of information, even when the hand is over.

    This is the heart of the information aspect of this rule, and a good counter to my argument: you can't ever separate information from fairness.

    Still, for you and others who think this way, essentially the fear that someone is going to take the fishes' money faster than you through information use causes you to invoke a rule focused on fair play. A little LOL, but ok.

    Of course, it works both ways. If you're a good player, and someone flashes a card and folds, you generally have an idea of what it is and don't need to be shown. This may seem trivial, but actually the rules don't protect the "bad players" or the "good ones" - they protect the game.
  • SullySully Red Chipper Posts: 768 ✭✭✭
    I quit asking to see a long time ago

    Whether in the hand or as a bystander I already know what they are holding :)
  • MnpokerMnpoker Red Chipper Posts: 95 ✭✭
    I think that SOSA need to be looked at in two ways. One being cash games and the other being tournaments. In cash games especially small stakes, who cares. Keep it light and keep it social. In tournaments I view it much differently. In tournaments showing your neighbor can and should result in a penalty.
  • persuadeopersuadeo Red Chipper, Table Captain Posts: 3,962 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited April 30
    Mnpoker wrote: »
    I think that SOSA need to be looked at in two ways. One being cash games and the other being tournaments. In cash games especially small stakes, who cares. Keep it light and keep it social. In tournaments I view it much differently. In tournaments showing your neighbor can and should result in a penalty.

    Ok, good reminder, we're talking about cash games here.

    A tournament is a formalization of the game with all sort of strictures placed on it in order to manage a mass of entrants. You're even told when to pee. A very different circumstance I don't want to get into.

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file